Skip to main content

About your Search

20130216
20130224
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
that depend on them, or would they rather put hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loopholes that benefit only the wealthiest americans and biggest corporations? that's the choice. are you willing to see a bunch of first responders lose their job because you want to protect some special interest tax loophole? are you willing to have teachers laid off or kids not have access to head start? or deeper cuts in student loan programs? just because you want to protect the special tax interest loophole that the vast majority of americans don't benefit from. that's the choice. that's the question. and this is not an abstraction. there are people whose livelihoods are at stake. there are communities that will be impacted in a negative way. i know that sometimes all this squabbling in washington seems very abstract. and in the abstract, people like the idea, you know, there must be some spending we can cut. there must be some waste out there. there absolutely is, but this isn't the right way to do it. so my door is open. i put cuts an
will collapse. this is $85 billion in net of three and half trillion dollar budget in the $16 trillion economy. i would be hard-pressed to explain how cutting 85 billion -- think of it as taking 85 billion out of your allowance of $3,800. eighty-five bucks out. as not going to end things. lou: percentages are, perhaps, the easiest way to comprehend this. 2 percent, you know, is not that significant. on the other hand, it is easy to recall that rat poison is mostly of meal in most cases with 2% poison in it. 2% can be deadly and destructive in some cases determined. go ahead. >> no one should argue this is a good idea. this is, as i was quoted, a bad idea whose time has come because the worse idea is to not deal with the spending. that is the problem. and at least they are agreeing that there not going to do nothing. so it is either do real spending cuts that are real choices and really passed the senate, which we have not seen passed the house. with this. lou: at some point, and i know that you are doing your level best to try to bring rationality into the nation. >> not my fault. lou: i under
hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loopholes that benefit only the wealthist americans and biggest corporations. that's the choice. are you willing to see a bunch of first responders lose their job because you want to protect some special interest tax loophole? are you willing to have teachers laid off, or kids not have access to head start? or deeper cuts in student loan programs? just because you want to protect a special tax interest loophole that the vast majority of americans don't benefit from. that's the choice, that is the question. and this is not an abstraction. there are people whose livelihoods are at stake, there are communities that are going to be impacted in a negative way, and i know that sometimes all this squabbling in washington seems very abstract, and in the abstract people like the idea, you know, there must be some spending we can cut, there must s out there. there absolutely is, but this isn't the right way to do it. so my door is open. i put tough cuts and reforms on the table. i'm willing to
shrinks the deficit faster than a growing economy that creates good jobs. we need to make america a magnet for good jobs, equipping our people with the skills required to fill the jobs. making sure their hard work leads to a decent living. those are the things we should be pushing ourselves to think about and work on every single day. that's what the american people expect. that's when i'm going to work on every single day to help deliver. so i need everybody who is watching today to understand we've got a few days, congress can do the right thing. we can avert just one more washington-manufactured problem that slows our recovery and bring down our deficits in a balanced, responsible way. that is my goal, that's what would do right by these first responders, these what would do right by america's middle class. that's what i'm going to be working on and fighting for, not just over the next few weeks but over the next few years. thanks very much, everybody. thank you guys for your service. [applause] [applause] jon: "happening now" at the white house president obama shake hands with a group
the american economy that is both unwelcome and unnecessary. it is an across-the-board cut in spending that some estimate will cost us 750,000 american jobs. >> congressman andrews said that often catastrophes are unavoidable. this one, he said, is completely avoidable. >> shepard: of course it is. it is this bunch of people in washington on the both sides of the aisle who say, if we don't get something done by this date, sequester kicks in. you now hey they decide to stop sequester? decide it doesn't have to kick in. >> leading republicans say they're open to a compromise on spending but saying no more new taxes. the president obama called for a balanced approach and the outcome was tax increases, cantor says, quote, president obama says unless he gets a second tax hike in eight weeks he'll be forced to let criminals loose on the streets, and emergency responders will be unable to do their jobs. these are false choices. we're faced with the negative effects of the sequester because democrats have not been able to take even the smallest step toward controlling spending. republicans say
. these are harmful cuts with real world consequences that will cost jobs and hurt our economy. >> reporter: the point is the white house now trying to push back, make the political argument of their own that this is going to be really harmful, it's going to hurt the public, there will be long lines at airports. some flights will be canceled, tours shut down for periods of time to deal with the budget cuts. the conservatives have been saying this is a small part of the federal budget and some of the cuts may not be as dire as the white house is playing it out to be. jon: interesting when you break it all down. jenna: ray lahood was talking about the nation's airports in relation to sequester. an airport in cleveland, breaking news, a plane off the runway there, harris? >> reporter: it's hopkins international. it's very slick there. we can take a live look now from our fox affiliate in the cleveland area. we do know that this plane may have hit the slippery conditions. there is a mix wintry precipitation that is falling right now. reports are that united airlines flight has landed already at the airpor
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)